5DII vs 7D test, part 2

[jackm1]

 

 

<p >Here is a landscape test of the two cameras, with more realistic sharpening applied to the 7D image. I'd say the 7D is holding its own.</p>

<p ><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.jmphotocraft.com/5DII_v_7D/shore.htm" target="_blank">http://www.jmphotocraft.com/5DII_v_7D/shore.htm</a></p>

 

 

[craigd]

<p>As you said on dgrin, it's holding it's own... considering the large difference in price. The 5D2 is clearly getting more detail in the trees, especially in the last shot. For the money the 7D is doing nicely, but you could compare the 7D to a Rebel and make the same claim on behalf of the Rebel.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>Now try the same test at ISO 1600...</p>

[john_a5]

<p>It appears to me that you are getting better micro contrast with the 5DII and that is showing up as being sharper. This may certainly have to do with the size/spacing of the "pixels" on the sensor, but I would consider the images that you have posted here from the 5DII as far superior to the 7D images. That isn't to say the 7D doesn't do a fine job, but they aren't really in the same ballpark.</p>

[steve santikarn]

<p>for this type of photo the 5DmkII is clearly superior to the 7D. Try shooting bird in flight or an Airshow and see how the result look.</p>

[Dave Luttmann]

<p>Yes, because landscapes on a tripod need 1600 iso. Oh brother!</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Jack, another worthy comparison.</p>

<p>I think the 5D MkII is a very clear winner for this type of image, indeed I don't see the 7D holding its own here. For sure the 7D is a superb camera, but for this type of image it is not in the same league.</p>

<p>Also I understand the reasoning for using the 24-70 for the test, but of my 5 L series lenses it is by far the least sharp and the worst for detail like this. Were I making this image with sales prints in mind there is no doubt I would use the 5D MkII and a much more appropriate lens.</p>

<p>If I was shooting birds or an airshow though Sitthivet, not only would I be missing the point, I would also use the 7D.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

 

<blockquote>

<p>Yes, because landscapes on a tripod need 1600 iso. Oh brother!</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

<p>Oh sister! Perhaps you mainly shoot landscapes at low ISO but most of us do other things and appreciate the superior high ISO of the 5DII. I rarely shoot during daylight hours. Obviously clean high ISO helps greatly at twilight, in European churches, stages, dark alleys and bars. </p>

 

 

[david_littleboy__tokyo__ja]

<p>"churches, dark alleys, and bars."<br>

My son, you are in need of more help than a mere camera can provide, I fear....</p>

[igord]

<p>I think the zoom lens is not good enough to make it. Maybe you could use prime lenses to see the real difference. In my opinion at such great distance the zoom lens hasn't got sufficient resolution. Few years ago someone here tested this very zoom against 50/1.4 and the prime was miles ahead with distant landscape photograph.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<blockquote>

<p>My son, you are in need of more help than a mere camera can provide, I fear....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I should have mentioned casinos and brothels as well... It's sorta like street photography but in enclosed spaces.</p>